DSLRUsers.com

I recently acquired yet another new lens - the Nikon AF-S VR 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED.

These are the first shots with that lens - the first two were taken in Hyde Park in the city the day I bought the lens.

The first is looking at a small depth of field and what the lens can do to throw out a very busy and colourful background. We get this sort of Monet watercolour feel with this image.

"Poppy Watercolour"

Nikon D90 + Nikon AF-S 70-300mm @ 110mm, 1/2500 sec at f/4.5, ISO 200

This next isn't a great shot of the ibis (people standing and sitting around it at high noon) but there were a few just walking about near the fountain so I figured I'd better try for a shot with the long lens racked out to maximum zoom to see how sharp the lens might be at it's least optimal focal length. I am quite happy with the smoothness of the out of focus background (bokeh) and the sharpness of the bird is actually probably better than I had expected at 300mm (450mm equivalent).


Nikon D90 + Nikon AF-S 70-300mm @ 300mm, 1/1250 sec at f/5.6, ISO 200

The next few shots were taken a few days later when the girls and I went for a long walk to town (and eventually dinner) late one afternoon.

The sun was almost setting and was very low near the horizon. This gave a beautiful golden glow diagonally from behind where we were walking up this street. The girls were walking away from me up the street and when I called they turned to give me this cheeky look.

"Cheeky Sunset"

Nikon D90 + Nikon AF-S 70-300mm @ 145mm, 1/200 sec at f/4.8, ISO 200

It was now quite late in the day (5PM) and the sun was essentially below our horizon at this stage. This meant I had to use both a slow shutter speed and higher ISO to grab this shot (even wide open for this focal length). The shot is noticeably not as sharp as I was hoping for and also has some noise but you can see what I was aiming for.

"Faces"

Nikon D90 + Nikon AF-S 70-300mm @ 180mm, 1/60 sec at f/5, ISO 560

Comments welcomed

Have been considering this lens myself, will be interseting to see some more work with it so plesae post more when you can. The other lens I have been considering along with this is the 70-200VR ( a used VR1 that is), the 70-300 is less than half the cost of a good used example, so I am edging to budget side, but I keep saying to myself will I regret it and end up getting the 70-200 in the long run anyway!

As it happens I had borrowed and used (thanks again to my trusty neighbour) Nikons uber AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR I (the first version) for a bit over a week – during a recent school athletics carnival and to do some portrait work at a school night-time fundraising event. It was a joy to use and produced sharp and smooth images. It is however very large (over 20cm long and almost 9cm in diameter) and very heavy (over 1.5kg) and very expensive (AUD$3K) and totally dwarf’d my tiny D90 and I did notice the size and weight when shooting for long periods hand-held.

The 70-300 that I bought I guess is not quite the poor mans equivalent but I’d say it’s the middle mans equivalent of the pro 70-200mm – it’s zooms further (out to 300mm – however it is sharper between 70 and 200mm), it is slower (f4.5-5.6) and is much smaller and half the weight. BTW: I picked up my 70-300 for $649 new at DDP so probably even quite a bit less than half the cost of the 70-200 second hand.

I have used this lens as well...and currently own the 70-200mm f/2.8 VR. I find that the 70-200 stays at home a lot due to its size and weight.

I like this lens a lot and have been tempted to buy it myself.

Almost 12 months on, Rodney, do you still like this lens?

I'm looking for a light lens with a bit of reach for my trip to Borneo later in the year. While most of the time will be diving, we do have a couple of days on land including the Orang-Utan Rehabilitation at Sepilok and proboscis monkeys at Labuk Bay. Would you recommend this lens for this?

I think the last photo, the heads popping
out from the hedge, is the best of the set. It
is fun, has lovely colours and pleasant smiles
of kids being playful.

The second is the bird because of the fine
details of the plumage, although it is an ugly
thing. I got a similar photo myself and I
reasoned that the best is the picture; the
ugliest is the bird.

ATJ wrote:Almost 12 months on, Rodney, do you still like this lens?
I'm looking for a light lens with a bit of reach for my trip to Borneo later in the year. While most of the time will be diving, we do have a couple of days on land including the Orang-Utan Rehabilitation at Sepilok and proboscis monkeys at Labuk Bay. Would you recommend this lens for this?

I do - I think it's a very nice piece of glass which isn't too heavy, big or expensive. I've even used it many times for childrens candid portraits to good effect.